<P>Can anybody give me some advice on how exposed oil prints should look
- should you be able to see detail in all areas?
<P>My experiments so far are not too successful.
<P>I coated some Arches textured paper with a 7% gelatin solution, several
coats. Then sensitised with 3% Pot. Dichromate.
<P>After about 5mins exposure in my printing frame, not in direct sun -
I do live in Belgium - I can see some shadow detail, but nothing in the
highlights.
<P><B>So, the question is should I be able to see highlight detail in a
exposed oil print?</B>
<BR><B>Did I underexpose the print?</B><B></B>
<P>After washing and drying I soaked for 5mins at 20c, blotted off the
surface water and inked with Lithographic Black 1796 (Graphical Chemical
& Ink Co).
<BR><B>Is this SOFT ink or HARD ink or what?</B> If its soft them maybe
the soft ink method would work?
<P>The ink took in the shadows but could get nothing in the highlights,
and found it difficult to build up the image - as I suspect that I had
nothing to build-up.
<P>Any ideas welcome.
<P>brgds
<P>Mel</HTML>
</x-html>From ???@??? Sat Aug 16 12:05:18 1997
Return-Path: <alt-photo-process-error@skyway.usask.ca>
Received: from skybat.usask.ca (skybat.usask.ca [128.233.1.27])
by netcom19.netcom.com (8.8.5-r-beta/8.8.5/(NETCOM v1.01)) with SMTP id PAA07928;
Fri, 15 Aug 1997 15:52:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from hil-img-6.compuserve.com by sask.usask.ca (PMDF V5.1-8 #15020)
id <01IMH4KY34349AZIFZ@sask.usask.ca>
(original mail from KINGNAPOLEONPHOTO@compuserve.com); Fri,
15 Aug 1997 16:41:37 CST
Received: from hil-img-6.compuserve.com by sask.usask.ca (PMDF V5.1-8 #15020)
with ESMTP id <01IMH4KE530Q9AWBGK@sask.usask.ca>
(original mail from KINGNAPOLEONPHOTO@compuserve.com); Fri,
15 Aug 1997 16:40:09 -0600 (CST)
Received: (from mailgate@localhost) by hil-img-6.compuserve.com
(8.8.6/8.8.6/2.5) id SAA27470; Fri, 15 Aug 1997 18:39:41 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Fri, 15 Aug 1997 18:39:29 -0400
From: Terry King <KINGNAPOLEONPHOTO@compuserve.com>
Subject: Re: Enlarged Lith Negatives
To: "INTERNET:FotoDave@aol.com" <FotoDave@aol.com>
Cc: "[unknown]" <ALT-PHOTO-PROCESS-L@skyway.usask.ca>
Message-id: <199708151839_MC2-1D46-CCF7@compuserve.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-disposition: inline
Comments: "alt-photo-process mailing list"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by netcom19.netcom.com id PAA07928
X-UIDL: 2fbbb8346c13c2f96a03c9309efb8c13
Message text written by INTERNET:FotoDave@aol.com
>
It is nice to know that they have continous-tone ortho and continuos-tone
panchromatic, and the price are not bad either; but these continous-tone
films are fast. How would one use in for enlarging? I believe neutral
density
was mentioned a while ago. I have a color head. Will it do basically the
same
thing if I dial up say 120 Y 120M 120C (for 4 stops down)?
<
If you are dealing with FP4, or a variant, it is quite possible to use it
on the baseboard of the enlarger. At 10 x 8 enlargement, test strips can
be made in half second stages at F 16.
Terry King